NARAYAN SINGH RATHORE,BINDAYAKA JAIPUR V. ITO WARD 6(3), NCRB JAIPUR

ITA 1072/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Narayan Singh Rathore, the appellant, against the ITO Ward 6(3), Jaipur, the respondent, concerning the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was directed against the order of the CIT(A) dated 19-06-2024, which had dismissed the assessee's appeal due to non-prosecution. The Tribunal noted the assessee's repeated non-appearance and lack of substantive defense or documentation to support his case. However, prioritizing the merits of the case over procedural lapses, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for a fresh assessment, imposing a cost of Rs. 2,000 on the assessee to be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund for his non-cooperation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470685 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 30-09-2024
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Capital asset; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 144; 54B

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, SMC, JAIPUR BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & DR MITHA LAL MEENA, AM ITA No. 1072/JP/2024 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Narayan Singh Rathore 32, Village: Maharajpura, Bindayaka Via Bhankrota, Post: Mukundpura, Jaipur Vs. The ITO Ward 6(3) Jaipur PAN/GIR No.: AHNPR 0569 B Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 30/09/2024 Date of Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 19-06-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2011-12 raising the grounds of appeal as mentioned at From 36. 2.2 During the course of hearing, the Bench noted that none appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called out for hearing. 2.3 On the other hand, the ld.DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) 2 ITA NO. 1072/JP/2024 SHRI NARAYAN SINGH RATHORE VS ITO, WARD 6(3), JAIPUR 2.4 The Bench has heard the ld. DR and perused the orders of the lower authorities and noted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee had failed to furnish any plausible explanation before him and thus the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. The narration as made by the ld. CIT(A) in his order is reproduced as under:- ‘’3.4 I have perused the grounds of appeal, facts of the case and the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. The appellant has not produced any material to controvert the finding of AO with any document, evidence which could rely upon. It has also been observed that the appellant neither disclosed the transaction about sale of land (capital asset) nor made any claim for deduction u/s 54B by filing an Income Tax Return within stipulated time. On merit AO’s order appears to be reasonable as per law. The appellant failed to furnish any proceeding, too. From the above conduct of the assessee, it is clear that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. In the event, I have no reason to interfere with the findings of the AO. In such circumstances, I dismiss the claim of the appellant. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.’’ 2.5 From the records, it is noted that since it is an admitted fact that the assessee is ex-parte before the AO and also before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, he could not put forth his defence. It was the bounded duty of the assessee to appear before the statutory authorities as and when called for. It is noticed that various opportunities were provided to the assessee for settling the issue but the assessee remained lethargic and unserious in pursuing his case for which a cost of Rs.2.000/- is imposed upon the assessee which will be deposited by the assessee in the Prime Minister Relief Fund. However, we are of the view that lis between the parties has to be decided on merits so that nobody’s rights could be scuttled down without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Hence, the matter is restored 3 ITA NO. 1072/JP/2024 SHRI NARAYAN SINGH RATHORE VS ITO, WARD 6(3), JAIPUR to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 2.6 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the AO shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by AO independently in accordance with law. 3.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced as on 29/10/2024 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. Sd/- Sd/- ¼ Mk0 ehBk yky ehuk ½ ¼lanhi xkslkbZ½ (Dr. Mitha Lal Meena) (Sandeep Gosain) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 29/10/2024 *Mishra vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant-Shri Narayan Singh Rathore, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward -6(3), Jaipur 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1072/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, Asstt. Registrar 4 ITA NO. 1072/JP/2024 SHRI NARAYAN SINGH RATHORE VS ITO, WARD 6(3), JAIPUR "